Summary: The dialogue starts with Socrates retelling to his friend Crito his encounter with Euthydemus an Dionysodorus. Euthydemus and Dionysodorus are two sophists that were previously occupied with the arts of war and laws but have taken up a new skill. Socrates wants them to teach him, but to he's cautious that the sophists wont teach him due to his old age. So he takes the young Clinias with him to the sophists and asks them to convince Clinias to pursue wisdom and philosophy. Ctessipus, a lover of Clinias, also partakes in the meeting with the sophists. Euthydemus starts by asking Clinias who learns, the wise or the ignorant? Clinias answers the first, after which he's asked whether teachers teach the learners and whether those who learn know what they are learning. He answers yes and that the learning do not know. Euthydemus then says that if the learners do not know then they are ignorant and Clinias was wrong about who learns. The sophists followers laugh at Clinias's mistake. During the questioning Dionysodorus tells Socrates that Clinias will be wrong no matter the answer.

This repeats throughout the entire dialogue, any questions and debate has the sophists employ wordplays exploiting the short and imprecise answers to make the questioned wrong and ridiculed every time. Ctessipus has a dog that is _his_, the dog is a father to puppies and Ctessipus beats the dog. Therefore the dog is _his_ father, Ctessipus is sibling with puppies and he beats his father. By the end Ctessipus has figured out their game and employs it against them.

In the ending conversation between Socrates and Crito the conclusion seems to be that even though the sophist's skill does not give deep insight or knowledge of a subject, one should still maintain curiosity for all things as a philosopher?

Overall this dialogue seems to be very sarcastic, Socrates constantly praises the skills of the sophists, but i doubt that this is Plato's sincere opinion. He must have had lots of fun writing it.

Observations:

The divine sign that Socrates has is mentioned in this dialogue, it's the first time outside of Apology that I've seen it mentioned. It tells him not to leave the Lyceum so that he can meet Clinias and the sophists.

What really is the difference between these word games of twisted logic and real philosophical investigations? It is just a matter of precise and thurough definitions of statements and definitions? Clearly simple answers are easy to manipulate, but these dialogues in general prefer short answers over long speeches.

Would Gorgias still defend oratory skill as just after reading this dialogue?